Facts
Y. and X. were married in 1997. The wife (Y.) lives in Switzerland and is a Swiss citizen. The husband is a dual Swiss-Czech national. On July 4, 2005, X. filed for divorce in Prague/Czech Republic. On October 18, 2005, Y. approached the District Court of Hochdorf in Switzerland to request the regulation of the separation. On June 19, 2006, the President of the District Court of Hochdorf ruled on the protective measures of the marriage, authorizing the parties to live separately, assigning the marital home to the wife, and obliging the husband to pay maintenance contributions to the wife. X. appealed this decision to the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which rejected the objection of lack of jurisdiction and slightly reduced the maintenance contributions. X. then filed a nullity appeal with the Federal Tribunal.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considered that the Swiss courts were competent to order interim measures under Art. 10 PILA, even though they were not competent to rule on the pending divorce petition abroad. Indeed, when divorce proceedings are pending abroad, the Swiss courts can order interim measures if there is a legal protection interest, for example if the applicable law abroad does not have a comparable regulation to Art. 137 CC, if the interim measures of the foreign court cannot be enforced at the Swiss domicile of the party, if it is necessary to take measures to ensure future enforcement on assets located in Switzerland, if there is an emergency situation, or if a decision of the foreign court cannot be expected within a reasonable…